• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

FAA warns public against shooting guns at drones

Deuce said:
Yes, like "Here are insane criminals, with their names and addresses. Come arrest them."

I sometimes fly very small planes and I don't want one of these morons taking shots at me thinking I'm the FBI coming to steal their land. People like that are too cowardly to shoot at a plane they think has feds on it, but they just might be dumb enough to shoot at what they think is a drone.
Click to expand...

If you are flying your toys over property that doesn't belong to you without the owner's permission then you deserve to have your toys shot down.
 
Binary_Digit said:
Deer Trail, CO. is considering an ordinance that would grant hunting licenses to shoot unmanned government drones. The FAA threatens criminal and civil liability for the hunters, as though they shot at a manned aircraft.

Deliberate destruction of government property, or righteous civil disobedience? Personally, I think the drones are unreasonable search because no warrant was issued, and unconstitutional laws should be disobeyed until repealed. But this has a public safety issue that sort-of muddys the water.

Article is here
Click to expand...

What about privately owned drones? Can you shoot them?
 
SMTA said:
You feel free to invite unfettered snooping into your life, even your bedroom.

Some of us are independent and do not need some agency to hold or hand, coddle us, or make us feel comfortable.
Click to expand...

Walking through city centers and/or bars/disco's you can expect to be filmed. That is not the same as snooping in my bedroom. Filming inside a house should be only done with a warrant from a judge but if you are accidentally filmed while a drone is following or is on surveillance duty is not something that a warrant is necessary.

Now if you are the target of said drone then a warrant should be acquired (except if they follow you after you already committed a crime which you were accidentally observed to have committed).

I am also independent but the sad fact is that our society needs security and cops, fbi and even drones at times will be needed.
 
Peter King said:
Walking through city centers and/or bars/disco's you can expect to be filmed. That is not the same as snooping in my bedroom. Filming inside a house should be only done with a warrant from a judge but if you are accidentally filmed while a drone is following or is on surveillance duty is not something that a warrant is necessary.

Now if you are the target of said drone then a warrant should be acquired (except if they follow you after you already committed a crime which you were accidentally observed to have committed).

I am also independent but the sad fact is that our society needs security and cops, fbi and even drones at times will be needed.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that a drone can fly up to your second-story bedroom window and film what's going on inside?
 
radcen said:
Are you saying that a drone can fly up to your second-story bedroom window and film what's going on inside?
Click to expand...

Apparently you can.

"This afternoon, a stranger set an aerial drone into flight over my yard and beside my house near Miller Playfield. I initially mistook its noisy buzzing for a weed-whacker on this warm spring day. After several minutes, I looked out my third-story window to see a drone hovering a few feet away. My husband went to talk to the man on the sidewalk outside our home who was operating the drone with a remote control, to ask him to not fly his drone near our home. The man insisted that it is legal for him to fly an aerial drone over our yard and adjacent to our windows. He noted that the drone has a camera, which transmits images he viewed through a set of glasses. He purported to be doing "research". We are extremely concerned, as he could very easily be a criminal who plans to break into our house or a peeping-tom."

So This Is How It Begins: Guy Refuses to Stop Drone-Spying on Seattle Woman - Rebecca J. Rosen - The Atlantic
 
radcen said:
Are you saying that a drone can fly up to your second-story bedroom window and film what's going on inside?
Click to expand...

No, I was not. The police has other options for filming someone in their bedroom/house.
 
Heebie Jeebie said:
Apparently you can.

"This afternoon, a stranger set an aerial drone into flight over my yard and beside my house near Miller Playfield. I initially mistook its noisy buzzing for a weed-whacker on this warm spring day. After several minutes, I looked out my third-story window to see a drone hovering a few feet away. My husband went to talk to the man on the sidewalk outside our home who was operating the drone with a remote control, to ask him to not fly his drone near our home. The man insisted that it is legal for him to fly an aerial drone over our yard and adjacent to our windows. He noted that the drone has a camera, which transmits images he viewed through a set of glasses. He purported to be doing "research". We are extremely concerned, as he could very easily be a criminal who plans to break into our house or a peeping-tom."

So This Is How It Begins: Guy Refuses to Stop Drone-Spying on Seattle Woman - Rebecca J. Rosen - The Atlantic
Click to expand...

Interesting.

To me, the advancement of technology does not change or invalidate existing legal tenets. The flying of a drone right up to a window is no different than crossing the property line and climbing a ladder up to the window. Neither is e-mail different than a written and sealed snail-mail letter.

That is just MY view, though. Legal interpretations may differ, and your mileage may vary.

As far as the sky being legal right-of-way, I don't disagree with that, but maybe because of advancing technology we should address this and establish a legal vertical limit where property does end or extend. Maybe 100 above the ground, or something similar.
 
ksu_aviator said:
There's no legal right to shoot at aircraft, manned or not, in the US. The airspace above your land is not your own. Any aircraft can fly as low as 500 feet above the ground. Plus, are you certain you can tell the difference between this passenger aircraft and this drone?

be35.jpg


0131-obama-pakistan-US-drones_full_380.jpg
Click to expand...

Exactly. Besides, I wouldn't worry about it, these guys are all talk. If they see a drone, they'll just go about their day as usual. Big talk does not equal big walk.
 
Surtr said:
Exactly. Besides, I wouldn't worry about it, these guys are all talk. If they see a drone, they'll just go about their day as usual. Big talk does not equal big walk.
Click to expand...

I'd bet that 99.9% of people who say they'd shoot one down wouldn't do squat.
 
radcen said:
I'd bet that 99.9% of people who say they'd shoot one down wouldn't do squat.
Click to expand...

Most of them don't even have the firepower or the skill necessary to do so. Anyone who thinks they can hit something flying 135 mph at an altitude of up to 30,000 ft is tripping balls on cough syrup.
 
radcen said:
I'd bet that 99.9% of people who say they'd shoot one down wouldn't do squat.
Click to expand...

I bet 99% that say they would shoot one down couldn't hit it if their life depended on it!
 
Peter King said:
Scenario (not totally unlikely): The FBI is using a drone to follow a known child rapist/killer who is suspected of having kidnapped another child and normally keeps the children alive to repeatedly rape before he kills them. The FBI is using a drone because a helicopter would be noticed much sooner by the suspect and the really want to follow him very closely to see if he leads them to the child.

Some idiot shoots the drone out of the air because he/she feels it violates their privacy rights and the child killer gets away, goes towards the child before the FBI can find him again and kills the child. Yeah, long live civil disobedience!!

Might be a bit far fetched, but with drones the police can much easier follow people and use observe properties suspected of crime to protect the public. Helicopters are useless because they are seen or heard much more easily and as you said they are expensive and not available in the numbers the police might need in a crisis situation.
Click to expand...

Scenario (actually happened): police request a drone from DHS to find an ex officer with a grudge against their department. They find the guy, and then burn the building in which he is ensconsed down around him.
 
Heebie Jeebie said:
Apparently you can.

"This afternoon, a stranger set an aerial drone into flight over my yard and beside my house near Miller Playfield. I initially mistook its noisy buzzing for a weed-whacker on this warm spring day. After several minutes, I looked out my third-story window to see a drone hovering a few feet away. My husband went to talk to the man on the sidewalk outside our home who was operating the drone with a remote control, to ask him to not fly his drone near our home. The man insisted that it is legal for him to fly an aerial drone over our yard and adjacent to our windows. He noted that the drone has a camera, which transmits images he viewed through a set of glasses. He purported to be doing "research". We are extremely concerned, as he could very easily be a criminal who plans to break into our house or a peeping-tom."

So This Is How It Begins: Guy Refuses to Stop Drone-Spying on Seattle Woman - Rebecca J. Rosen - The Atlantic
Click to expand...

I'd have the asshole arrested as a peeping tom, AFTER shooting down his drone. Not only would he be without his drone, but he would end up on the sex offender's list for the whole world to see, and I would be sure to show the list that he's on to all the neighbors.
 
Travelsonic said:
Yes.

Anyone who is well versed in identifying aircraft, at least, can absolutely easily tell the difference. I've never even studied those two types of aircraft and can spot a lot of noticeable differences.

Hell, even those not well versed in spotting aircraft - but able to recognize patterns - could do that fairly easily - they're similar, but not so similar it's impossible to distinguish the two.
Click to expand...

You can't be certain enough and most people shooting at these things wouldn't have one iota of a clue about the differences. They'll end up shooting down an ultra light or a katana with a retired couple on board.
 
Surtr said:
Most of them don't even have the firepower or the skill necessary to do so. Anyone who thinks they can hit something flying 135 mph at an altitude of up to 30,000 ft is tripping balls on cough syrup.
Click to expand...
Not if your talking police helicopter drones that can hover overhead for several minutes. If helicopters can get shot down by ground fire in battle why would this be any different?
 
Iron Yank said:
Not if your talking police helicopter drones that can hover overhead for several minutes. If helicopters can get shot down by ground fire in battle why would this be any different?
Click to expand...

The United States isn't a combat zone, and Americans are gutless ankle biters who wouldn't hurt a fly when it came down to it.
 
danarhea said:
I'd have the asshole arrested as a peeping tom, AFTER shooting down his drone. Not only would he be without his drone, but he would end up on the sex offender's list for the whole world to see, and I would be sure to show the list that he's on to all the neighbors.
Click to expand...

It would have to be illegal first.
 
You would never use the permit...but it would be fun to have.

Maybe you could find a bi-plane from WWI and chase it down like the red baron. Other than that, I don't see you making a successful shot at it.
 
Surtr said:
Because surveying the area for illegal drugs is totally like killing 6 million Jews.
Click to expand...

Because hiding behind "just doing my job" leads to guards at concentration camps. It's the slippery slope thing. At some point it is your responsibility to say no, this is not right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom